|
Popy posted:We are gonna Better Things Aren't Possible our way into Armageddon. Meanwhile you have the rightwing loons saying "gently caress it, maybe we can make this a White Christian Nation." And people here are supporting the guy that wants to work with and compromise with them. 
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 19:38 |
|
|
surely this time we'll control capitalism with policy.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:12
|
|
|
Civilized Fishbot posted:From what I can tell, there's two different sane reasons not to vote for Joe Biden even though he appears to be the "lesser evil" I think those are definitely two of the possible reasons, yeah. I think they have a lot more overlap though, seeing as how you're in camp 1 and 2, and I think there are a lot of other sane reasons to not vote for a democratic president as well, Joe Biden or otherwise.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:13
|
|
|
is pepsi ok posted:surely this time we'll control capitalism with policy. I don't like the neoliberal capitalist world order either, friend, but in this November election there will be no winner who will abolish it. We work within the reality we find ourselves in.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:14
|
|
|
How are u posted:If Biden and Trump are my two choices then I will choose Biden because his administration will be better for the climate than Donald Trump. That's the entirety of the math. Biden's climate platform is deeply disappointing, but it exists. It is unarguably better than the alternative. I've already said in this thread, today, that I think Trump losing the electoral college, i.e. Biden winning it and thus the presidency, is part of what's probably the best plausible outcome if he's the nominee. I also think that caving to him now is stupid and defeatist and both tactically and morally wrong, and that he absolutely should not be accepted as the nominee at this point in time, because he is not; there's still time to replace him, despite the Democrats engaging in obvious bullshit like shutting down only the presidential primary in New York after they're already moving to vote-by-mail. There is no damage that can be done to Biden now that wouldn't be done later anyway. Talking about him being a rapist? The media will be all over that the moment they're sure he's the nominee. Talking about his massive history of over-the-top racism? It's already known and is only going to be brought up more and more over time. Pointing out how utterly insufficient his climate plan is and how he's letting oil companies lead us into an early grave? Again, it's going to happen either way, and in that case the earlier and more it's hammered on the greater the (slight) chance of him being forced to improve on that. Republicans aren't going to ignore any weapon they can use against Biden; we cannot hurt him in a way that he won't be eventually regardless of our actions. It's best to go full-bore on what a shitbag he is now, since that's the most likely way to get him replaced. Hell, even if you're already planning to vote for him, you should stop trying to shame and shut up his critics and get them to pledge to him before the primaries are even over; if his issues are addressed now, then his campaign can work to either fix them or at least make defenses against them so that they can better address them in the general when Republicans inevitably deploy them against him and his campaign is blindsided by something completely loving obvious and in the public record (though they're such trash this'll probably happen anyway). He's already a terrible candidate, and he'll be an even worse one the longer his obvious flaws go unaddressed, because he will not make it through the election without them coming up sooner or later. All the cowardice and rape-apologism his defenders are displaying, in this thread, on Twitter, and on the actual news, will accomplish is making a lovely, harmful outcome that much more likely, whether in the form of Trump's reelection or the election of a Biden who had all his worst traits and policies accepted and defended and thus is the worst Biden he could possibly be, which is pretty loving bad because Joe Biden is a terrible human being whose strings are being pulled by other terrible people, plus collateral damage like how #MeToo's been dealt a deathblow by all this. Don't accept Joe Biden. Don't apologize for his lies, his racism, his warmongering, his rape, his open molestation of children, his refusal to promise a plan with the slightest chance of saving the planet (and even if it does is guaranteed to lead to a massive refugee crisis that, judging from his history of open racism and being worse on immigration than Henry Kissinger, combined with the actions of the Obama administration, he is certain to handle in an unspeakably cruel manner), or any other awful aspect of him. Fight to make them throw his rear end out. Turn the tables on the Dems; instead of letting them cow you into submission with the threat of the Republicans (who they actively try to be like anyway), make them think that you're willing to sink the ship if you aren't listened to, even if you aren't; even if you think there's no chance of them actually getting rid of Biden, there's no reason to just lie down and accept him already because there will not be a single concession made on healthcare, the climate, basic human decency, or whatever, unless you give the Democrats a reason to make them. If you are defending Biden now, months before the convention, you are a fool, a coward, a conservative, or some combination thereof, and are actively working to make the future worse whether you realize it or not. Do not accept Joe Biden. Roland Jones fucked around with this message at 02:21 on May 7, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:16
|
|
|
How are u posted:OK, that's a lot of hopeful talk about a 3rd party winning, but in this November 2020 Presidential Election I am reasonably certain a 3rd party won't be a viable choice, and the only two realistic outcomes are either Trump wins reelection or the (D) wins. Of course. You have to be able to "win" before you'll do the obviously good thing. Good luck on that.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:18
|
|
|
How are u posted:Sounds to me like Sunrise is basically going through the same unfortunate turmoil as we are here in D&D. I imagine they'll come around sometime in the next 6 months.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:20
|
|
|
Somfin posted:Of course. You have to be able to "win" before you'll do the obviously good thing. Good luck on that. Biden can't win, though
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:21
|
|
|
I wholeheartedly agree that Joe should drop out now and let the party tear itself a new rear end in a top hat picking a new nominee. Or maybe he should pick his VP and then resign or something. I think everybody would be better off with literally any of the other candidates as the nominee (except maybe Bloomberg, debatable I guess?). We're far enough out from the election, and time moves so loving slowly these days, that we have plenty of time to pick somebody better.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:21
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:That seems about right. That you imagine it, I mean: your entire understanding of politics seems to be based in your imagination. And when they turn around will you vote for Joe?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:21
|
|
|
Somfin posted:Of course. You have to be able to "win" before you'll do the obviously good thing. Good luck on that. Well yeah, you have to be able to win. Otherwise Trump wins and things get even worse than they are now. That seems entirely reasonable to me?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:22
|
|
|
How are u posted:I wholeheartedly agree that Joe should drop out now and let the party tear itself a new rear end in a top hat picking a new nominee. Or maybe he should pick his VP and then resign or something. I think everybody would be better off with literally any of the other candidates as the nominee (except maybe Bloomberg, debatable I guess?). He should have loving retired and never, ever ran at all. Goddamn egos. Gucci Loafers fucked around with this message at 02:33 on May 7, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:22
|
|
|
Scientist Al Gore posted:And when they turn around will you vote for Joe? Nope.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:24
|
|
|
Scientist Al Gore posted:Blaming anyone for drug addiction is super low blow and we all know which party has made aggressive aggressive enforcement and sentencing a top priority. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reducing_Americans%27_Vulnerability_to_Ecstasy_Act#Legislative_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violent_Crime_Control_and_Law_Enforcement_Act https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/11/18/joe-biden-marijuana-gateway-drug-legalization/ https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4802791/user-clip-biden-praising-civil-forfeiture-laws-flat-time-sentencing imagine being this loving dense
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:24
|
|
|
Civilized Fishbot posted:From what I can tell, there's two different sane reasons not to vote for Joe Biden even though he appears to be the "lesser evil" there's a lot of overlap because biden is the worst choice both morally and pragmatically
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:24
|
|
|
How are u posted:I wholeheartedly agree that Joe should drop out now and let the party tear itself a new rear end in a top hat picking a new nominee. Or maybe he should pick his VP and then resign or something. I think everybody would be better off with literally any of the other candidates as the nominee (except maybe Bloomberg, debatable I guess?). and if he doesnt, you will _______________
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:25
|
|
|
How are u posted:Well yeah, you have to be able to win. Otherwise Trump wins and things get even worse than they are now. That seems entirely reasonable to me? So what you're saying is that we should pick the thing that makes a symbolic gesture toward helping, even if it doesn't actually help because it doesn't do anything to take care of the real underlying problems Except that you're saying that to indicate that I should vote to help Biden win, and also to argue against voting for a third party that accurately represents my interests.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:29
|
|
|
Scientist Al Gore posted:And when they turn around will you vote for Joe?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:30
|
|
|
also Sunrise Movement is not going to endorse lol
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:32
|
|
|
Holy poo poo someone is going loving ape on the avatar purchases lol E: That's a minimum of 30 usd that could have been spent on helping Biden actually win, so far (they screwed up at least one of the repurchases of mine) Somfin fucked around with this message at 02:39 on May 7, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:33
|
|
|
Somfin posted:Holy poo poo someone is going loving ape on the avatar purchases lol I really like the one I have, I'm totally okay with it.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:34
|
|
|
Scientist Al Gore posted:I really like the one I have, I'm totally okay with it. The trolley problem's really just a math problem, if you refuse to think about it
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:44
|
|
|
Until Biden states who he would put on the supreme Court, I consider that argument completely worthless
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:44
|
|
|
Civilized Fishbot posted:My answer to the trolley problem is that you should pull the lever, and I believe that out of a sense of rule utilitarianism. The (well, one) difference between the choice facing voters and the trolley problem is that voters are players in a game with multiple iterations, where their choices during one round affect the choices available in future rounds. If you're thinking about the elections after 2020, the ones in 2022, 2024, 2026, 2028, you want to affect the candidates that'll be available, and the stance those candidates will have, and the mechanism available to you as a voter is to set standards for which candidates you'll support and which you won't. Thanks for this. It coincides with something I've been mulling over regarding theories of change, specifically in terms of realignment of the democratic party and how it responds to protest votes/disengagement, because I feel like a lot of people fall into two camps: * People who are inclined to vote for Biden (and any other democrat they come across in the ballot box) and believe that doing so will eventually (read: eeeeeeevvvvveeeeeennnnnnttuuuuuuaaaallllllyyyyyy) result in the party being in a better position to respond to the needs of the citizenry and that the party would take that opportunity to implement more substantial policy reforms (GND, MFA, UBI). * People who are disinclined to vote for Biden are likely of the mind that abstaining will signal to the party that the platform has to take their concerns seriously and move further left in order to capture their votes. I view individuals within both of these camps as likely wanting the same thing: to maximize the amount of "good" we can derive from our governmental institutions. A lot of the disagreement could be chalked up to differing beliefs on how this is accomplished. So my question is if anyone can point to how these two theories of change have played out for left-leaning parties in the past? Have parties been successfully reprimanded by leftist non-voters in the past and shifted left in response? Or do they just go chasing after more racists in order to close the gap? Do left-leaning parties tend to push the overton window left in moments periods of political dominance or do they offer diminishing returns the longer they retain power? Can this even be quantified in a shifting political landscape? I'm most curious about how this has played out in other societies besides America since the 2018 midterms have been thoroughly analyzed at this point and everyone has pretty much drawn their own conclusions about how that played out. (This analysis only takes into account individuals who still have faith left in electoralism, so I understand that this does not apply to everyone here) edit: Scientist Al Gore posted:Trying make some crazy wild prediction potentially decades in the future with a billion data points is impossible. Why should I even consider this? lol okay so not everyone is actively engaged in this mode of utilitarian decision making I guess... whiggles fucked around with this message at 02:47 on May 7, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:44
|
|
|
E: wrong thread
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:45
|
|
|
How are u posted:I don't like the neoliberal capitalist world order either, friend, but in this November election there will be no winner who will abolish it. We work within the reality we find ourselves in. you're doing the opposite of that though. the reality is we stop capitalism or we all die. you're doing something you know will fail.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:46
|
|
|
Trump is not better than Joe Biden on climate change and anyone arguing to the contrary is a blithering dipshit. He is also, however, not great on climate change and he's not going to be "moved left" when he's already loading up his policy party with a bunch of proven ghouls, so anyone voting for Joe Biden specifically to save the earth from climate death is also a loving rube. There, debate over. It is possible to determine that Joe Biden is the lesser harm. That is perfectly reasonable. I just don't think it's a compelling reason to ignore his many flaws and vote for him. (I originally flip flopped the first line and I apologize) Solanumai fucked around with this message at 02:58 on May 7, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:49
|
|
|
On one hand, the first candidate is a senile old rapist, who, while largely ineffective himself, staffs his cabinet and offices with a bunch of ghouls, who are rather effective in making the world directly worse for everyone. On the other hand, the other candidate is a senile old rapist, who, while largely ineffective himself, will likely staff his cabinet and offices with a bunch of ghouls, who will be rather effective in making the world directly worse for everyone. Shere posted:It is possible to determine that Joe Biden is the lesser harm. That is perfectly reasonable. The only advantage to electing Biden is that we'd see less of his stupid face than we see of Trump's.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 02:55
|
|
|
Shere posted:Joe Biden is not better than Trump on climate change and anyone arguing to the contrary is a blithering dipshit. Really? Are these people blithering dipshits? Scientists and climate experts endorse Joe Biden for president quote:We believe it is our solemn responsibility to inform our fellow citizens about the dangers of climate
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:01
|
|
|
My plan to deal with this election is to get forced to go back to work, catch COVID and die. And that way no one can ever ask me who I voted for.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:01
|
|
|
Scientist Al Gore posted:Really? Are these people blithering dipshits? They're absolute blithering dipshits. The goal is "actually loving doing something about climate change." Neither Biden nor Trump will, albeit for different reasons, and "paying lip service" does not actually count as doing something.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:02
|
|
|
Scientist Al Gore posted:Really? Are these people blithering dipshits? Yeah you snuck in an own on my backwards posted thought, I'll eat it. I would never actually claim that Trump is better than Joe Biden on climate change. I was aghast when I re-read my post because I agree with you. I just think it's a meaningless distinction when the difference isn't enough to matter. e: to extrapolate, I think asking climate scientists "Biden or Trump" is a meaningless, loaded question. They will always say Biden because Trump is a loving denialist. Solanumai fucked around with this message at 03:19 on May 7, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:03
|
|
|
Terror Sweat posted:Until Biden states who he would put on the supreme Court, I consider that argument completely worthless I don't understand why anybody thinks Mitch McConnell would ever let him appoint anybody even remotely approaching a centrist to the court, let alone left of center, and even that is predicated on the dangerous assumption that he would want to appoint someone who wasn't just Brett Kavanaugh with a different coat of paint. The whole argument of "but Biden will surround himself with better people" argument rings hollow when it's virtually guaranteed to be a cabinet full of aloof finance execs and lobbyists. Didn't he float Bloomberg for a potential cabinet position? Do we expect him to do any better than Obama in this regard? The supreme court is hosed already and if having an administration that isn't openly racist is the only bar to clear then electoral politics at the federal level are officially loving useless.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:03
|
|
|
Zamujasa posted:The only advantage to electing Biden is that we'd see less of his stupid face than we see of Trump's. That and watching the Biden voters scuttle backward into the shadows after he abandons literally all of his promises six months in because the budget demands it Scientist Al Gore posted:Really? Are these people blithering dipshits? It's a real shame that Biden's climate plan doesn't meet their "must" requirements, and that they're very obviously only endorsing him as the theoretically better of two options (just like you keep telling us you are, even though you keep scrabbling to find people who actually do support him) Also I'm intrigued how eulogising Strom Thurmond doesn't constitute enough of an endorsement of white supremacy for him to pass the line
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:05
|
|
|
Somfin posted:It's a real shame that Biden's climate plan doesn't meet their "must" requirements, and that they're very obviously only endorsing him as the theoretically better of two options (just like you keep telling us you are, even though you keep scrabbling to find people who actually do support him) It's shame that Bernie's plan wasn't even the best either, it was Jay Inslees!
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:06
|
|
|
Scientist Al Gore posted:It's shame that Bernie's plan wasn't even the best either, it was Jay Inslees! You keep bringing up this point as if it somehow makes voting for Biden's climate plan good E: Like, well done, there's someone who isn't running who was better than someone else who also isn't running, how is that in any way an endorsement of the person who is running Somfin fucked around with this message at 03:09 on May 7, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:07
|
|
|
Somfin posted:You keep bringing up this point as if it somehow makes voting for Biden's climate plan good I just think it's lame to say his plan wasn't enough when in reality climate change is the biggest problem humanity has ever face along with it being solved over multiple decades. And to this day, no one really has a good plan.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:09
|
|
|
I guess no one wants to weigh in on how long I have to vote for people who won't do poo poo for my rights before other people who don't give a poo poo about my rights will stop yelling at me to vote for a rapist.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:16
|
|
|
Scientist Al Gore posted:I just think it's lame to say his plan wasn't enough when in reality climate change is the biggest problem humanity has ever face along with it being solved over multiple decades. And to this day, no one really has a good plan. So does relative badness matter or not, you keep flip flopping on this Araenna posted:I guess no one wants to weigh in on how long I have to vote for people who won't do poo poo for my rights before other people who don't give a poo poo about my rights will stop yelling at me to vote for a rapist. Look, Araenna, you just need to understand that, just like with all previous elections, the idea of actually getting anything you want is a pipe dream and you need to sit down and give old white men what they want instead. Something something Virginia.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 19:38 |
|
|
Somfin posted:So does relative badness matter or not, you keep flip flopping on this How so?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2020 03:18
|
|